21 CFR 1316.59 - Submission and receipt of evidence
| Cite as | 21 CFR 1316.59 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
71 practice notes
-
Decisions and Orders:
...it proper to give weight to relevant portions of affidavits of Respondent and Respondent's employees and patients. See 5 U.S.C. 556(d); 21 CFR 1316.59(a) Substantive Issue Whether a preponderance of the evidence establishes that, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(4), Respondent's DEA COR BR52873......
-
Masters Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Decision and Order
...of the distance between Port Charlotte and Sarasota as determined by using the online Rand McNally mileage calculator. Pursuant to 21 CFR 1316.59(e), Respondent may dispute this finding by filing a properly supported motion no later than 10 days from the date of this Ms. Seiple further asse......
-
Farmacia Yani; Decision and Order
...Id. at 29. (Indeed, I have taken official notice that the DEA registration validation web-tool provides this information. See 21 CFR 1316.59(e)). Moreover, the ALJ entirely ignored Ms. Soto's testimony (which is corroborated by the Government's evidence), that following the audit by a healt......
-
Trinity Pharmacy II; Decision and Order
...ALJ's to admit expert testimony even where the expert was not licensed in the state where the violations were alleged to have occurred. 21 CFR 1316.59(b) (``Opinion testimony shall be admitted when the presiding officer is satisfied that the witness is properly qualified''); Grider Drug #1 ......
Request a trial to view additional results
3 cases
-
Craker v. Drug Enforcement Admin., No. 09–1220.
...reconsideration to refute any facts of which the Administrator had taken official notice during the proceedings. Id. at 2108 n. 24;see21 C.F.R. § 1316.59(e). Availing himself of the opportunity, Dr. Craker filed a motion for reconsideration in January 2009. He also requested that the hearin......
-
Craker v. Drug Enforcement Admin., No. 09-1220
...to refute any facts of which the Administrator had taken official notice during the proceedings. Id. at 2108 n.24; see 21 C.F.R. § 1316.59(e).Page 13 Availing himself of the opportunity, Dr. Craker filed a motion for reconsideration in January 2009. He also requested that the hearing be reo......
-
Klinestiver v. Drug Enforcement Administration, No. 78-2178
...402 U.S. 389, 402, 91 S.Ct. 1420, 28 L.Ed.2d 842 (1971). Nonetheless, petitioner contends that the applicable DEA regulation, 21 C.F.R. § 1316.59(a) (1978) erects a higher standard for the admissibility of evidence in a DEA hearing, permitting the introduction only of evidence that would be......